The Truth About Abraham Lincoln and Slavery in the US - WARNING: Your Public Indoctrination Is About To Be Exposed

We see and hear the rants of the Alt-Left people about slavery, but how many actually know the truth about slavery? How many know who was the first person to obtain the legal right to own another person? How many of the left and Alt-Left know about the first attempt at the 13th Amendment? How many of these people actually know who owned slaves? How many of the Antifa clowns actually know the truth about Abraham Lincoln?

There are so many questions that must be answered and these people should ask them but they have no real concern about what they started. They only wish to have a Communist or Socialist government. Antifa acts like the Nazi SS and that could be explained by the man who pays them to be that way, George (The Nazi Sympathizer) Soros. But let us get back to answering the questions above and show the Truth that is well documented about slavery that many ranting about slavery never will believe or accept.

First, there is no record of any boat being built in the South for the slave trade.

In Massachusetts, in 1637, the first slave ship was built for the transportation of slaves to the United States and other ports of call.

Boston was where these “SLAVE” ships left to pick up their cargo in Africa by one of two means. The first was simply to wait for an unsuspecting African to come by and capture him or her. In the second case, it became a bit more complicated. A slave trader would make an alliance with a tribal chief through giving him rum or other such amenities and the tribal chief would wage war on a neighboring tribe. Any of the enemy that the chief wanted to trade, he would do so for goods such as tobacco or liquor. We must remember that in 1637, the Thirteen Colonies were under British rule.

One has to question how slavery was actually established. Here we learn through clear documentation from Virginia, Guide to The Old Dominion, WPA Writers’ Program, Oxford University Press, NY, 1940, p.378. Here it is well noted how and who obtained the “LEGAL” right to own an individual under British rule.

The below paragraphs were from page 16 of this authors book, “Forward The Colors” which is being rewritten now, and it came from the above-referenced document.

“Slavery was established in 1654 when a free black man by the name of Anthony Johnson convinced the “BRITISH” court in Northampton County that he was entitled to the lifetime services of a black man by the name of John Casor. This was the first judicial approval of lifetime servitude except as punishment for a crime. Anthony Johnson had a number of firsts to proclaim. He was one of original 20 brought to Jamestown in 1619 and “sold” to the colonists, he earned his freedom in 1623 and in 1651 bought five servants as his own. He was actually the founder of slavery in Virginia and the first black slave owner. It should be pointed out that this had happened during the time that Britain still controlled the Colonies.”

I used the book “The Negro in the Making of America” by Benjamin Quarles Collier Books 10th Printing 1968 Library of Congress No. 64-21333 as my reference for the following information. I also used the National Archives website Southern Messenger[1] web site in the compilation of the following narrative on slavery.

The slave trade began in 1441 when Prince Henry the Navigator sent Antonio Gonsalves to the west coast of Africa to get skins and oils. After the Captain landed near Cape Bojador, he took possession of gold dust and ten Africans. Prince Henry was pleased with the gifts, especially the Africans, sending some of the Africans to the Pope.

Here we clearly see that slavery in what is now the United States was begun by the Judgment of a British Court. Now, given the ideology of Antifa, Black Lives Matter and the other Alt-Left people, the British flag should be banned from US soil due to their judgment of making slavery “LEGAL”! The facts mentioned here show that a BLACK Man won the legal right to own another black man.

From Page 33 of “Forward The Colors” I document the following facts about the 13th Amendment of 1861, signed by one President Abraham Lincoln.

“On February 28, 18614. In this attempt at the 13th Amendment those in Congress spelled it out briefly and to the point just what it would be. On page 1284 of the Congressional Globe dated February 28, 1861, in the third column almost midway the 13th Amendment of 1861 is given as follows.

Art. 13. No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State.

4 See page 1284 of the Congressional Globe

This 13th Amendment was signed by Abraham Lincoln to try and stop the secession of the Southern states.

Let us take a look at this because this shows without a doubt that had this Amendment of 1861 been ratified by the states, Slavery would have been legal until a future time. Here we have to state that the War for Southern Independence, also called the Civil War, and also the War Between the States actually began in April of 1861, some two months AFTER President Abraham Lincoln signed the 13th Amendment of 1861. Had the war been just about slavery alone, it would have never started due to this amendment allowing slaves in states that had them. This is perhaps the best document to show Slavery was not the reason for the “Civil War”.

Now let us find out who owned slaves and who brought slaves to the South. This destroys all the ideas that slaves were brought in by Southern people and that many people of the South owned slaves. Both ideas are based upon false figures and false statements. We will show this below from the book, “Forward The Colors”.

Once in the American British colonies, these slaves were nothing more than property. They were not considered as subjects of the British colonies and had no rights bestowed upon them. From their arrivals in Boston, New York, or Rohde Island, they were transported to the South to be sold.

The slave traders in the Northern states would trade rum and other items for slaves. These owners would then move them into Maryland, Virginia, South Carolina, and any where else where they could get money for their commodity.

Once the slave was sold, they became the property of the new owner. Most slave owners treated their slaves decent, mainly due to the fact that they were worth more than a horse and without them, the produce could not be harvested and sold. It was also cheaper to own a slave then to hire a laborer, which cost at that time about 70 cents a day. In a little more than a month and a half, the slaves had actually paid for themselves.

At first, they did not have many farms or slaves, but once it was learned about the good profit of both, many men decided to move from the North and do farming in the South. In time the Northern colonies became less and less dependent on slaves. The South became more and more dependent on slaves due to the orders of their farm goods by the Northern colonies.

There were those hateful owners who beat and treated their slaves bad. These owners had no care for their slaves, most of them had little care for anything but money. Many of the other slave owners objected to the treatment of slaves by these owners. In turn they were told to mind their own business.

In New York, the big farms along the Hudson had about 8,000 slaves out of the New York colonies 20,000 total slaves. In the middle British colonies of New Jersy, Delaware, and Pennsylvania, slaves were also employed in agriculture. In Connecticut and South Rohde Island, slaves were used in stock farming. Another typical use of slaves in the Northern colonies were as house servant, butler, valet, coachman, cook, maid, and laundress.

The harsh slave laws enacted by the British government was done as a means to keep peace. Where blacks outnumbered whites, the slave laws were strict. New York for example, had harsher slave laws then Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New England. This was due to the number of slaves in New York. Under these harsh laws in New York, no more than three slaves could assemble when not working.

Rhode Island had the largest amount of slaves out of the other New England colonies. If slaves in Rhode Island were accused of disturbing the peace, stealing, or other crimes, they were treated more severely than their counterparts in the surrounding colonies.

The growing number of slaves gave chance for slave insurrection causing the colonies to call for an end to the importation of slaves. Some colonies tried to prohibit slave trade and place heavy tariffs on it. The British Crown struck down such measures encouraged by Parliament and the British ship owners. The different points of view by the British Government on slave trading and the colonies wanting to end it was a chief reason for the break up of the two.

In Massachusetts, the legislature passed anti-slave measures in 1771 and 1774, but the British royal governor stopped them from becoming law. In 1774 Rhode Island and Connecticut voted to stop the slave trade. Rhode Island went further to add any slave brought in her boundaries would become free. Pennsylvania in 1773 imposed a heavy duty on every imported slave. Virginia and North Carolina in 1774 and Georgia in 1775 placed restrictive measures on slave trading.

On April 6, 1776, the seeds of American freedom were planted. The Continental Congress voted that no slave be imported into any of the thirteen original colonies. This along with other concerns about the British rule was forming the colonies into a united front.

Slaves were shipped into Northern Ports to be sold to the Southern Colonies, which is based upon factual documents from many sources that display the facts that the slave trade was from the Northern Colonies.

However, few, if any, would ever make that statement because it does not fit the objective of their narrative. It has to, once again, be pointed out that it was the British Government that made slavery legal and it was the British Government that refused to stop slave trading.

Those in the Northern colonies of New York, Boston, and other Northern ports brought the slaves in and made the money on selling them.

Now, using today’s ideology about slavery, we should ban all things from the Northern states that remind us how they brought slaves into the united States. Let us take a look at how many slaves were in the South before Northerners brought more down to the South. Again from the book, “Forward The Colors"...

“Masters emigrating from the North to the South were responsible for approximately 445,000 of the 742,000 blacks moving from the less profitable areas North East, and West, to the more profitable South.”

The South had just 237,000 slaves before masters from the North brought down 445,000 slaves to make money from their service. That indicates that it was Northern people that brought many more slaves into the South just to make money.

“Frederick Law Olnsted, a traveler wrote about a group of blacks waiting to go to work for their new master, twenty-two of them were wearing blue suits, black hats and carrying a bundle of clothes and shoes. They stood tall in silence catching the eye of the passers-by. Olnsted wrote of this, “Louisiana or Texas, thought I, pays Virginia twenty odd thousand dollars for the lot of bone and muscle.” That would be about $900 a person if there were only twenty of them. In those days only the rich could afford these prices. A horse was much cheaper, but could not perform the tasks that the slaves could. In most instances, due to the price, slaves were highly cared for because of their high cost.

The world demand for cotton caused the Southern need for slaves. Many slaves worked the fields, but many worked in the cities as domestic servants caring for homes and cooking. It was the need for these slaves that brought the onslaught of the “War for Southern Independence”. In fact, it was the pressure to supply the world with cotton that began it all.

France had freed their slaves prior to the sale of the Louisiana Purchase. Many of these free blacks roamed the country. Many other free blacks came from the North. In Virginia towns, 157 blacks actually owned real estate by 1860. The free blacks in Virginia by 1860 held fifty-four different kinds of jobs and had become a factor in the state's economy.

Blacks not only owned land but some actually owned slaves. The Morial Family in New Orleans owned four slaves in their cigar factory. In Charleston, black tavern keepers and hotel owners catered to whites. Jehu Jones owned property worth $40,000. Aaran Ashworth of Jefferson County Texas owned 4,578 acres and 2,470 head of cattle and was one of the largest cattle ranchers in the county. William Goings of Nacogdoches employed nine slaves and several whites in his blacksmith shop. Goings had a white wife and was fluent in Cherokee, which helped him. One of the richest if not the richest black in the South was Thomy Lafar of New Orleans. He owned $500,000 in real estate.

Another Louisianan, Cypnian Ricaud owned an estate valued at $225,000 in Iberville Parish along with ninety-one slaves.

The free blacks in New Orleans numbered 18,000 in 1860 and owned $15,000,000 in taxable property. New Orleans had two black regiments in the militia, this was before the Louisiana Purchase. These black regiments were used in the Battle of New Orleans by General Andrew Jackson and drew acclaim from him for their help in the defeat of the British.

Blacks were restricted in several Northern states. Ohio had a law that a black could not enter without first furnishing a $500 bond to guarantee good conduct. Illinois, the Land of Lincoln, where Lincoln himself was a member of the state congress and voted for the law which required a black to post a $1,000 bond, Indiana’s constitution prohibited blacks from residing within the State. In Iowa, a black could not testify against a white in court.”

Many blacks in the South owned slaves. There is so much more to be said about who owned slaves, and those who treated them like family and those who beat them. Most people of the South could not buy slaves. However, ones that could do so, worked in the fields with them and bore great friendships.

But it is very clear that Communists had a great hand in bringing racial divide to our nation. One such man is widely known and his ideas were brought forward to the violence of today. The Congressional Record demonstrates what the Communist wished to do and it is very clear these words could easily be used with the Alt-Left today. Let us show this Communist ideology.

“From Israel Cohen titled, A Racial Program for the Twentieth Century”. This can be found in the Congressional Record, volume 103, page 8559, June 7, 1957. In this passage Mr. Cohen shows why blacks are led the way they are with the following words,

“We must realize that our party’s most powerful weapon is racial tensions. By propounding into the consciousness of the dark races that for centuries they have been oppressed by whites, we can mold them to the program of the Communist Party. In America, we will aim for subtle victory. While inflaming the Negro minority against whites, we will endeavor to instill in the whites a guilt complex for their exploitation of the Negro. We will aid the Negro to rise in prominence in every walk of life, in the profession and in the world of sports and entertainment. With this prestige, the Negro will be able to intermarry with the whites and bring a process which will deliver America to our cause.”

This is exactly what is being done by the Alt-Left today. Many still will say that the Alt-Right is worse, but that side of the coin has not been festering for years and cannot produce the number of people who believe the trash that the Alt-Right preaches. It is the Alt-Left, through groups such as Antifa, Black Lives Matter, The New Black Panthers, and others, who use what seems to be the very ideas of the Communist Israel Cohen.

Everyone loves to use the Emancipation Proclamation that was written by Abraham Lincoln as the point slaves were freed. This is WRONG! The Emancipation Proclamation had no legal or Constitutional grounds whatsoever. The Emancipation Proclamation was written as a military maneuver only, and President Lincoln even stated that to his Chief Justice questioned him about writing it.

To quote the most important part of the letter to Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase on September 2, 1863.

Knowing your great anxiety that the emancipation proclamation shall now be applied to certain parts of Virginia and Louisiana which were exempted from it last January, I state briefly what appear to me to be difficulties in the way as such a step. The original proclamation has no constitutional or legal justification, except as a military measure. "

Here is a documented letter to the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1863 that shows without a doubt that the “Emancipation Proclamation” was not holding to any legal or constitutional laws. The proclamation was not worth the paper it was written on and it did not free a single slave. Slaves were freed by the 13th Amendment on December 6, 1865.

In his speech on the Dred Scott decision on June 26, 1857, Lincoln stated, “I have said that the separation of the races is the only perfect preventive of amalgamation.”

Near the end of his speech, Lincoln stated this about the Democrats.

“The Democrats deny his manhood; deny, or dwarf to insignificance, the wrong of his bondage; so far as possible crush all sympathy for him, and cultivate and excite hatred and disgust against him; compliment themselves as Union savers for doing so; and call the indefinite outspreading of his bondage “a sacred right of self-government.”

Lincoln, on one hand, says the races should be “separate,” and then he damns the Democrats for abusing the slaves. It is wild.

We could go on with this showing of how slaves were not the cause of the so-called" Civil War," but we have demonstrated that it was all about the money.

Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, & Twitter. You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

About the AuthorLeon Puissegur

Leon Puissegur is a Disabled Vietnam Veteran with 3 children and 9
grandchildren. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for 43
years. He is an award winning author and has been writing opinion pieces over the years and in just the
last few years has written 4 books and a large amount of articles on many
sites. You can purchase his books at Amazon. Pick up his latest The Oil Man.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.